Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Naming Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Quabbin committee leans toward a ‘no-naming’ policy after yearlong review, places draft on next agenda
Summary
After months of subcommittee work, the committee supported language to keep existing recognitions but not name new buildings or fields and voted to place a third draft on the table until the next meeting for further action.
Get email alerts on the Naming Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Quabbin Regional School Committee’s naming-policy subcommittee reported that it could not find a practicable, equitable approach to naming buildings, fields or other district facilities and recommended keeping current recognitions but not instituting new naming rights.
Subcommittee members said the group considered alternatives — including designating areas on specific campuses or creating committees to decide names — but concluded those approaches raised equity, procedural and logistical problems. The subcommittee’s recommendation, reflected in the meeting packet as a third draft dated 11/14/2024, would prevent future naming of buildings and fields while allowing existing recognition displays (for example, trophies and banners) to remain.
Committee members discussed whether to give the superintendent authority to form naming committees and whether to allow naming for deceased or living individuals with a higher approval threshold; the subcommittee reported discomfort with delegating the choice because it could reintroduce the same disputes the committee had repeatedly considered.
Following debate, the committee voted to place the third draft on the table until the next meeting (the procedural vote was recorded by roll call). Members stated the policy aims to preserve equitable recognition across academic and extracurricular programs without privileging particular interests.
The subcommittee stated the policy retains current recognitions in trophy cases and display galleries, and does not permit new naming of buildings or athletic fields. The committee said if community members prefer a different approach, the second draft remains available for consideration in subcommittee work.

